Recent comments

  • Media Log 2014   5 days 2 hours ago

    I updated it when I updated my latest update of my now updated Greatest Albums Extended (and updated) list.

  • 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die (combination list including all 4 editions)   6 days 3 hours ago

    • Titles read as of September 16, 2014: 125

    (I still can't edit my original comment, but updates I previously had to list as individual comments are now all aggregated again into one. Perhaps a kindly moderating brownie is tidying things up when I'm not looking. If so, thank you!)

  • Favorite TV Shows   1 week 2 hours ago

    They're the best ones.

  • The 100 Greatest Electronic/Dance Albums   1 week 6 hours ago

    Dude thank you so much for posting the sample of contenders for the next 100. This list was already one of the most useful lists for me (the influence/acclaim/popularity criteria makes it pretty great for someone who knows very little about electronic music and needs to what the essential albums are), now it's even better.

    I wish your Favorite Albums article was longer and had more entries. Your description of The Fat of the Land has made me want it so bad. I will get Second Toughest in the Infants as well (Dubnobasswithmyheadman is the first techno/progressive house masterpiece I've heard in my life! totally changed my attitude towards the genre)

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 1 day ago

    But it's quite different from the original 1967 release. 6 extra tracks makes a huge difference; indeed, it could be said that the 17-track release is more like a compilation.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 1 day ago

    I didn't think it was necessary. It's long been the standard release hasn't it? I'm pretty sure the other ones have been out of print since 1997 (At least in the US. I've never even seen them).

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    re: Rubber Soul...not necessarily? I can totally see I've Just Seen a Face and It's Only Love fitting on RS, though I haven't heard the US album.

    re: "For a really good time, check out the Animals' albums on wikipedia." I'm really regretting doing that :/ Also, Wikipedia tells me Animalisms is a UK album which makes my head hurt even more.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    "The one on my list is the 17-track release." Mention that on it then! :P Just like you mention the specific versions of your Greatest Films.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    It's so annoying that they did this... Headache...turning...on... ;-) From a historical perspective, it's interesting that it pretty much ended (I think?) date-coincident with Blonde On Blonde and the on-slaught of concept albums and albums conceived more as cohesive works of art.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    The one on my list is the 17-track release. It's very possible my 8.2/10 rating is too low (I've had it 8.3+ before). I think the UK release is somewhat oddly sequenced, though this may be because I am so used to the 17-track version. I would start it with Purple Haze for sure -- about as perfect an opener as possible. I might place Hey Joe after Manic Depression and Wind Cries Mary after I Don't Live Today.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    You can say that again. Until '67, British record companies thought that it was best to leave singles off of albums to prevent cannibalization, but American companies wanted to repackage. That's why the Rolling Stones' discography looks like a mess, for example. I would tend to consider the UK versions as the official ones, not because the lack of singles made albums artistically "purer" (that was just an accident), but because they were usually completed first. Luckily, we seem to think that most of the music "afflicted" by this annoyance isn't good enough for our lists anyay :).

    This one's a particularly confusing exception to my rule:

    - In July 1965, the Stones released recordings completed in May, mostly A and B sides of singles (including "Satisfaction").
    - The parts of [US] which weren't singles were combined with new non-singles recorded in September and released later in September as [UK].
    - I would say that [US] is just a compilation and that [UK] is an album, despite the fact that [UK] includes songs already released on [US] (as if the release was only for record company profit and [UK] would've happened anyway, albeit maybe with a different title if they wouldn't have had the phrase "out of our heads" to borrow off of).
    - On the other hand, collector-wise, it's more efficient to get [US] and then get the missing tracks via the US-only comp, "December's Children (And Everybody's)"

    - For the pre-digital age peeps, note that there's a lot of re-shuffled album art across the US and UK albums. Hopefully those scowling facial expressions are right up your alley.
    - I would imagine that Brian Wilson got a hold of the UK version of Rubber Soul - his feelings about how well the album goes together wouldn't be right for the US version, which contains bits of the already outdated Help!
    - John Cale brought the Who's single "Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere" back to NY after a trip to England in August 1965. I'm guessing he pre-ordered the UK debut, released in December, rather than wait for the US debut (April). This is based on the Velvet's "European Son", played live in January, sounding loosely based on the Who's "The Ox"
    - For a really good time, check out the Animals' albums on wikipedia. I'm going with this as their official 60's discography: Animals [UK], Animal Tracks [UK], Animalisms (a US-only album), and Animalism (note, singular)

  • Favorite TV Shows   1 week 2 days ago

    The seasons mentioned are those you've seen or just the best ones?

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    The version on your Greatest Albums list is the original UK version though, right? By the way, the 17-track compilation has three tracks not found on either the UK or US version I think. If those are not counted, then where would you place Purple Haze, Hey Joe and The Wind Cries Mary on the UK tracklisting to make the best possible 14-track version, and what would your estimated rating of this version be?

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    In the 60's there were lots of idiotic UK and US releases of albums. The best version of AYE is definitely the 17-track "combination" of tracks from both releases, which -- I am pretty sure -- has become the "standard" release over the last 15 years or so.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    Great, thanks :D

    What do you think about the two versions of Are You Experienced?

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    RE: It's a Fire from Portishead's Dummy ... yes, don't know if it would make enough of a difference to raise the album a ratings point or not, but it's a better album with it than without.

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    Perhaps The Terminator, or maybe The Cook the Thief His Wife and Her Lover... or... well, it was nice knowing you...

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    I haven't listened to Litanies of Satan but I did listen to Diamanda Galas so I think I know what this lawyer is like :/ What about his movie equivalent though? The Terminator? Texas Chain Saw Massacre? :P

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 2 days ago

    My lawyer will be contacting you shortly. I rate him an 8.8/10, and the emotional/thematic equivalent of Diamanda Galas' Litanies of Satan.

  • Songs With Women's Names in the Title   1 week 2 days ago

    The actual title of the song is "Candle In The Wind" by Elton John and the first lyric is "Goodbye Norma Jean". :)

  • 1001 Songs You Must Hear Before You Die   1 week 3 days ago

    Thank you for a great list!
    I recently bought the book and I'm now creating a spotify playlist with the "10101 Songs Must Hear Before You Die", which can be found on the last pages of the book! It will take some time to finish, but please follow =)

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 3 days ago

    And I hope it remains that way -_-

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 3 days ago

    Nice! It's all good, I don't mind at all. I haven't copyrighted it! (yet???) :-)

  • Media Log 2014   1 week 3 days ago

    Of course you do. I found it from your list XD

    (Sorry for stealing your Top 10 Movies/Albums/... of the Week format by the way)

  • Top 10 Movies, Music & Miscellaneous Art of the Week (2014)   1 week 3 days ago

    Yea, it's been ridiculous :) Perhaps unbelievably, I've managed to go through approximately 1500 painters (mostly modern, 1960s to present) and about 15000 of their paintings over the last few weeks alone. What I've posted here are what I deemed significant enough (7.8+) to add to my list, so it goes to show one that for every 7.8+ there are hundreds of lesser works (many of which were great too). I've probably discovered at least 1000 more paintings for the 7.3 - 7.7 range but simply don't have time to track those and have decided not to focus my list on those ratings because it would slow me down too much. Any work I've posted here that fell below 7.8 was because I initially thought it would be 7.8 or better.

    This site is a very good start:

    If you want to jump ahead from the earliest history of paintings to more significant artists, on page 7 it covers Giotto, who was probably the first great painter (that emphasized more compelling and emotional qualities in his scenes).

    Generally speaking, wikipedia is an excellent source for well-known artists (for both information and pictures) and a "so-so" source for lesser known artists.

    Also, Scaruffi's recent history of visual arts (modern - early 1900s on up) is a great snapshot of several significant artists with direct bullet points about their significance, though if you're trying to avoid my selections for now, he's recently added several of them upon recommendations I emailed him.

    His (old) greatest western paintings list is excellent too, particularly for pre-1920s works (though many of the links no longer work).

    The best sources, aside from traveling to all the museums that house paintings (!!!), are to go to a bookstore/library and read and view the history of art (or different sections of it) through various art books (preferably large ones). These often have the best pictures. While they almost never cover the significant rarer works such as some of the ones I've found (only after crawling down many rabbit holes!) they are the best way to get a foundation and good viewing perspective of the main body of significant works. What I have done many times was go to the bookstore/library and go through those and take notes, notes and more notes and then use the internet to explore further from there. The internet is obviously the fastest way. I don't have specific books to recommend but perusing the shelves will get you acclimated pretty quickly. They're usually the larger books that cover a section of visual art history with large, high quality pictures in them. I've looked through hundreds, including books specific to certain artists, which I also recommend.

    As a note, I've hardly begun to add significant works from the periods 1300 - 1800 to my lists. There are probably some 8.8+ in there, and certainly several 7.8 - 8.7 works.